Search for: "Does 1-152" Results 281 - 300 of 868
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Sep 2018, 11:30 pm by Nico Cordes
Thus, the central button 8 corresponded to the claimed manual cook button.The board does not agree with this assertion. [read post]
20 Sep 2018, 5:00 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“In order for evidence to qualify as documentary,’ it must be unambiguous, authentic, and undeniable” (Granada Condominium III Assn. v Palomino, 78 AD3d 996, 996-997; see Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 73 AD3d 78, 86). [read post]
19 Sep 2018, 6:00 am by Kevin Kaufman
Suppose this company does not have any investment opportunities and so chooses to repurchase 50 shares at $10 each. [read post]
”  In Carpenter’s case, the Government sought and received an order for 152 days of records from MetroPCS and 7 days from Sprint. [read post]
2 Jun 2018, 4:12 pm by Wolfgang Demino
He and his wife are the owners and managingmembers of Samara Portfolio Management, L.L.C.1 Until 2014, Samara was in* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 12:13 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
But thisCourt does not read MPEP § 1207.03 or 37 C.F.R. [read post]
22 May 2018, 9:18 pm by David Frakt
 (For comparison purposes, Caucasians and Asians both have a mean LSAT of about 152, so a far smaller percentage of Caucasians and Asians would be excluded by a sensible LSAT cutoff.) [read post]
21 May 2018, 6:17 am by Joy Waltemath
(The court noted that the reviewing board clarified the purpose of the cross-reference to c. 152, which addresses expanded penalties for misclassifying workers but does not address whether an individual is an employee for purposes of workers’ comp benefits). [read post]
28 Apr 2018, 2:13 pm by David Frakt
So how does the ABA explain its about face on Cooley? [read post]
27 Apr 2018, 6:09 am by MOTP
As a result, a “party’s challenge . . . to the contract as a whole . . . does not prevent a court from enforcing a specific agreement to arbitrate. [read post]
24 Apr 2018, 2:12 pm by Chris Attig
App. 152 (2009) which, arguably in dicta, rejected that expansive characterization of the Camacho holding. [read post]